"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Good talk and from a capitalist, so he knows how it is run. A few years back during the height of the recession, a large hardware chain (Home Depot) wanted to come to some areas of Northern Los Angeles and open a few new large stores. Hundreds, perhaps thousands complained that the big-evil company would be taking away jobs from the poor and middle class and that they don't treat the workers good, etc.

Being a capitalist myself, I knew that the big company, although it is true does not always provide the best benefits; however they do hire hundreds, perhaps thousands of people. The poor and middle class were defending the many small businesses and the mom-and-pop hardware stores in the area. Those mom-and-pop stores don't hire anyone! As the talk mentions, capitalists hire people as a last resort -- they only do so when they are too big to run it themselves.

The real job creators as the talk mentions -- are the consumers and then when the store gets too big, the capitalist must hire staff to run his/her operation.

David N. Snyder wrote:Being a capitalist myself, I knew that the big company, although it is true does not always provide the best benefits; however they do hire hundreds, perhaps thousands of people. The poor and middle class were defending the many small businesses and the mom-and-pop hardware stores in the area. Those mom-and-pop stores don't hire anyone! As the talk mentions, capitalists hire people as a last resort -- they only do so when they are too big to run it themselves.

The real job creators as the talk mentions -- are the consumers and then when the store gets too big, the capitalist must hire staff to run his/her operation.

I think you are getting this backwards. Mom and pop stores hire a lot of moms and pops...and other people as well. Fact is that it takes MORE people to provide the same amount of goods and services through small stores than it does through big stores. It also takes MORE workers to build enough small buildings compared to a few larger buildings...and it takes more tax accountants to keep the books for smaller businesses....etc. etc. etc........

Fact is that from an employment standpoint and ignoring all other considerations, small businesses employ vastly more people than large ones in providing the same amount of goods and services...that is why large business are displacing small ones....it is called "efficiency of scale".

I understand this because I have been a capitalist too.....I'm wondering why you don't understand this. Could it be that you have bought into the Hype just like the video describes?chownah

From an Australian perspective, there's only perhaps 3 or so hardware chain stores around... I can't remember the last time I saw a 'mom-and-pop' hardware store in a metropolitan area. Economies of scale simply do not leave room for it.

If you want the scale (and the associated efficiency benefits of scale) without the rigid owner/worker classification inherent in chain stores, the only other viable option seems to be operation as a co-operative.

(sorry I haven't seen the talk ~ i can't access it from my current location)

Metta,Retro. B.Ec.

"When we transcend one level of truth, the new level becomes what is true for us. The previous one is now false. What one experiences may not be what is experienced by the world in general, but that may well be truer. (Ven. Nanananda)

“I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes.” (MN 31)

Interestingly, during the beginning of the GFC some years ago, the Australian government started issuing cheques to people. From memory people received a $1,000 cheque from the government to spend and the government also invested $b in education infrastructure projects to shore up the national economy in the face of a global economic depression. From all reports, the tactic worked. It seems from my point of view that consumption appears to be a major driver of economic growth.kind regards,

Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Ben wrote:It seems from my point of view that consumption appears to be a major driver of economic growth.

...and "austerity" does the opposite, as some European nations are rediscovering.

The problems come about when this "pump priming" (either via government spend, or private spend through government handouts) is when either the levels of debt become untenable, or when capacity cannot increase (i.e. due to lack of efficiency gains) and all you get is inflationary pressure as more people compete for limited goods and services.

Capitalism really has just become a consumption machine, but it has no inherent checks and balances to question the real cost of the relentless drive to maximise net consumption (e.g. vested interests, wealth/income inequality, environmental degradation).

Metta,Retro.

"When we transcend one level of truth, the new level becomes what is true for us. The previous one is now false. What one experiences may not be what is experienced by the world in general, but that may well be truer. (Ven. Nanananda)

“I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes.” (MN 31)

retrofuturist wrote:Capitalism really has just become a consumption machine, but it has no inherent checks and balances to question the real cost of the relentless drive to maximise net consumption (e.g. vested interests, wealth/income inequality, environmental degradation).

Unless there are robust corporate regulations in place.

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

chownah wrote:...that is why large business are displacing small ones....it is called "efficiency of scale".

Corporatism is the new capitalist way in First World nations and now extending to other nations too. I am not saying it should be that way and actually I don't like it. I would prefer the Adam Smith capitalism to corporatism, but unfortunately the Wealth of Nations model appears to be gone forever. The corporatist giants have too much power, money and influence and regularly make deals with the government.

From an Australian perspective, there's only perhaps 3 or so hardware chain stores around... I can't remember the last time I saw a 'mom-and-pop' hardware store in a metropolitan area. Economies of scale simply do not leave room for it.

If you want the scale (and the associated efficiency benefits of scale) without the rigid owner/worker classification inherent in chain stores, the only other viable option seems to be operation as a co-operative.

(sorry I haven't seen the talk ~ i can't access it from my current location)

Metta,Retro. B.Ec.

In a nutshell the video is about how there is myth which is accepted as fact that myth being that rich people or big business is what creates jobs....and that the facts seem to point to consumers as being the catalyst for job creation. A secondary point the video makes is that rich people or big business gets special treatment and consideration under the law because of this myth.....and that it seems that rich people or big business has bought into this myth so fully (it is accepted without questioning by both political parties in the US) that they have come to expect special treatment and advantage.

I want to point out that this is nothing new.....back in the sixties the alternative press uses to talk a lot about the welfare system for the rich......when there was large scale unemployment back then and the capitalist lobbies and conservatives made a big effort to eliminate food stamps some creative free spirits started a slogan to just "eat the rich".

Mt post was to show that even here there are people who believe in this myth even in the face of a video attempting to dispel it!!!!

Just a side note: to talk about small enterprise as having inefficiency helps to propagate the misconception. The impression made when saying someone has inefficiency is much different than calling some "less efficient" I think.